Those being: Bitcoin Gold developer Martin Kuvandzhiev allegedly integrated a 0.5% fee into a BTG mining pool that was then directed to his cryptocurrency wallet; that some mining pools removed the code as it became publicly available; a failure to publicize the fork and the private mining of tens of thousands of blocks raised suspicion that Bitcoin Gold was a way for its developers to enrich themselves.*

*From Sam Bourgi, Chief Editor to Hacked.com

Do the above give Bitcoin Gold a deserved "doodoocoin" rating?

Trying to get a feel for how those here (who know more than I) think about it all.

Have to get this one off my chest also. Cryptokitties is a game on the Etherium blockchain/network where people buy, sell and breed digital cats, and the cats end up kind of being just another way to hold ether?

Good god, I know nothing.

I'm on a roll. What's up with Bank of America having "48 blockchain-related patents and patent applications? A search of Google’s patent database shows Bank of America owns 27 patents containing the word “blockchain,” 36 that include “bitcoin” and 39 that include “cryptocurrency.” And likely a few that have a differently-named assignee" (from Yahoo Finance).

Obiviously, you don't have to have a coin to use the technology. If anyone can use the technology and borrow from the open source why use cryptocurrency at all? Money digitized is money digitized. Ones and zeros, zeros and ones. Call it a U$D or a RXP, what would be the difference? If I understand the minds of these banksters they are going to set up their own blockchain ecosystems, use the efficiency to enhance profits and harden the security of their systems with the cryptography (tweek it here and there) and patent how they are using it because they can. It's what I would do were I in their shoes.

"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities" Voltaire

Brick's wrote:Have to get this one off my chest also. Cryptokitties is a game on the Etherium blockchain/network where people buy, sell and breed digital cats, and the cats end up kind of being just another way to hold ether?

CryptoKitties was supposed to be a way to get non-crypto people interested in blockchain with a fun, simple, easy to use unique game. The creator said he thought the kitties would be purchased for $1 worth of ETH or less, not hundreds or even thousands of dollars. My advice: stay away. I don't think it is a way to "hold" ETH. You hold the smart contract to a unique kittie and can sell it on the market I believe, but you need a buyer. I only have limited surface level knowledge of this game. All I remember is that it clogged the network and increased gas fees.

Brick's wrote:I'm on a roll. What's up with Bank of America having "48 blockchain-related patents and patent applications? A search of Google’s patent database shows Bank of America owns 27 patents containing the word “blockchain,” 36 that include “bitcoin” and 39 that include “cryptocurrency.” And likely a few that have a differently-named assignee" (from Yahoo Finance).

Obiviously, you don't have to have a coin to use the technology. If anyone can use the technology and borrow from the open source why use cryptocurrency at all? Money digitized is money digitized. Ones and zeros, zeros and ones. Call it a U$D or a RXP, what would be the difference? If I understand the minds of these banksters they are going to set up their own blockchain ecosystems, use the efficiency to enhance profits and harden the security of their systems with the cryptography (tweek it here and there) and patent how they are using it because they can. It's what I would do were I in their shoes.

Andreas calls this the "gilded cage" of the banks. They will set up their "intranets" and the real innovation will happen in the open-source world and we will leave them behind. This is such a great talk that I'm sure I've posted it somewhere before, but it gets directly to your question/observation.

So looking up 2FA, I'm finding out 2FA requires that you enter a One-Time Password (OTP) that is sent to your smartphone to complete your login process. I don't have a smart phone. Will it send a text to a "stupid phone" (Its a Samsung/Verizon flip that is at least 4-5 years old most likely older)?

"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities" Voltaire

Brick's wrote:So looking up 2FA, I'm finding out 2FA requires that you enter a One-Time Password (OTP) that is sent to your smartphone to complete your login process. I don't have a smart phone. Will it send a text to a "stupid phone" (Its a Samsung/Verizon flip that is at least 4-5 years old most likely older)?

If you can receive text messages then you are good

Zelle, square cash, PPFF if we have to. Postal Money Orders, and Personal Checks. Shipping prices do not include insurance. If you want insurance/registered mail, it's always extra.

Brick's wrote:So looking up 2FA, I'm finding out 2FA requires that you enter a One-Time Password (OTP) that is sent to your smartphone to complete your login process. I don't have a smart phone. Will it send a text to a "stupid phone" (Its a Samsung/Verizon flip that is at least 4-5 years old most likely older)?

Text messages (SMS) has been around since 1992. 2007 was the first year that the average person sent and received more texts than phone calls (source: mashable). So it seems likely that any phone from the last 10 years can handle texts.

Binance is a pain to log into. First there's that "drag the puzzle piece" thing to make sure you're not a bot. (How would a bot type in my password?) I never get it right on the first try, because the 3D shadow effect makes it difficult to align the edges. Then there's the 2FA stage, and you must have your cellphone at hand to see the SMS code. The price I pay to protect the loot in case someone manages to get into my account. They can't withdraw unless they have my cellphone (and my fingerprint to turn it on).

Now, if a thief has my login password, my cellphone and the index finger of my right hand, he's good to go!

trapperrick wrote:Outside of its volatility there is just one thing that keeps stopping me and it was the second post on this thread

AGorBust wrote:There is a lot wrong with bitcoins, the first of which is it is strictly electronic. If the government limits your access to the internet they can effectively render you insolvent.

Also, if the power goes out, from an apoctalyptic point of view, do you actually own anything?

A more compelling argument to invest in Bitcoin is Bucketeer's post [in the Bitcoins fad or trend thread] of a possible Bitcoin ETF and the fact that Robinhood, my online brokerage account, is now trading a few forms of crypto.

I fully understand this objection. If there is an extended global or national power outage, crypto will be the least of our concerns. A person would still own their crypto when the power was restored though. This is another reason I am not "all in" on just gold, or just crypto, or just fiat. They all have their place. If this is the only objection one has to crypto though, it would be akin to someone fearing being struck by lightning so they choose to never leave their house if there is a single cloud in the sky. The risk is there, but the odds of a national extended (a week or more) power grid failure is small. For those who disagree, I expect they live in the country on the farm, growing their own food and are fully prepped for such a contingency. I would applaud anyone that prepared, and would give them credit for the objection.

The governments of the world already limit access to the internet in some respects. The Dread Pirate Roberts is serving a life sentence for running an open market drug website, and money laundering (Silk Road). But this gets back to liberty more than anything else. What law would be necessary to outlaw usage of a smart contract? Western governments have already taken the "monitor & tax" approach. China has the "ban & wait" approach for now. But they will get left behind by Japan and Korea and likely come around at some point. One can choose their level of privacy in crypto. You could only trade Monero (privacy crypto) on a decentralized exchange with no KYC if you want. Or you can fully verify yourself and buy and sell bitcoin/ETH on Coinbase, who have passed all the regulatory hurdles necessary for US citizens. If a Western government founded on individual liberty is so tyrannical that they ban the use of all crypto, perhaps it is time to find a new home, because that won't be the only freedom being taken away.

Either way it is good to see people researching the pros/cons of crypto.

Not sure where to ask this question so I’ll try here. Looks like I’m going to need a new cell phone in the very near future and I’m wondering how to transfer the 2FA Authenticator apps to the new phone? I’m using “DUO” for GDAX and “google Authenticator” for everything else. I’ve looked on the net and so far haven’t found a solution for this situation. If anyone has experience with this, please explain (like I’m an 88 year old ) or maybe provide a link for transferring from phone to phone.

Silversaving wrote:When I swapped phones, I just logged into the site using my laptop, turned off 2fa. Took out my new phone and turned 2fa back on using it. Took 15 seconds

Sounds simple enough. So just load the 2FA apps on the new phone and turn it back on? Do you have to re-scan bar codes?

Yeah, that's how i remember it. I logged into the site using my old phone with it's 2FA on. I then went to settings and disabled 2FA. I then got my new phone (after D/Ling 2FA app for it) and turned 2FA back on for the site. it had me go though the whole process of scanning the code again for the new phone app but simple enough. Then done!